Comment by written | Hacker News Reader

Comment by written | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Hmm, I never thought my informative post would get flagged, while baseless speculation is upvoted.

The parent is pretty much 9/11 inside job conspiracy level stuff. I just stated a few facts about what happened, and how that contradicts the parent's speculation.

Anyway, whatever. Evidently HN is not a forum for reasonable discussion around this topic, because people don't follow what's happening wrt Syria closely.

EDIT: Let's just say, that this reaction is pretty typical. Almost universally, whenever a chemical attack happens and is reported, we're told that rebels are doing it to themselves as a false flag, to inspire western intervention.

After 40th case of rebels successfully throwing canisters with chlorine upon themselves from helicopters they don't have, to inspire intervention that never happened in the last 7 years or didn't bring anything good,... it gets ridiculous...

The problem is that anyone who doesn't watch closely, only sees this one medialized case in MSM, and thinks that false flag somehow may make sense. And "why would Assad use chlorine?" pops up, when it's docummented he uses it regularly.

I'm just guessing but maybe you were flagged because of the way you argue. You're both strawmaning my argument and associating it with a conspiracy theory. Nobody would be against a good faith debate.

My opinion is not as fringe as you make it to be. It's true that there are consensus from politicians and the media about what happened but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the truth. In fact, respectable academics are looking at this from scientific point-of-view and coming to the same conclusion.

Here is a UK professor applying probablity theory to understand the weight of the evidence for the alternative explanation in the alleged gas attacks in 2017 and 2013: https://timhayward.wordpress.com/2017/08/31/who-is-responsib...

I’ve read that blog post a while ago and sorry but it just doesn’t cut it the problem with applying game theory in these cases is that you don’t actually have access to correct intelligence and information both in terms of the actual events as well as the motives and parameters under which all the parties operate.

In this case he's applying probablity theory which is basically "reasoning under uncertainty". If you're interested in this check out a book called Superforcasters which is an elite team of forcasters that use similar methods to predict and answer questions about geopolitics and other stuff. They beat government and intelligence community forcasting using Bayesian reasoning and similar methods.

I have read supercasters and also unmaking the west i think you are either projecting and extrapolating way too much from them.

You are also ignoring the IO that russia is been running which is essentially a carbon copy what they used to run during the cold war, only considerably more amplified and effective these days.

I'm actually frightened by the fact that there are now links here to what is an unquestionably a new breed of academic UIC's now I thought the last of these died shortly after the wall fell.

Perhaps your comments would be received better if you'd cite some sources for your claims, otherwise they look pretty much like a speculation as well, and not informative or stating facts.

He didn’t made any claims other that those which were well proven and reported on.

The other half of this thread is a conspiracy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com